Ongoing Assessment of a University Foreign Language Program

Foreign Language Annals

Volumn 37, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 630-640

  Mathews, Thomas J ^a   Hansen, Cheryl M ^a  

^a WEBER STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33751232567     PISSN: 0015718X     EISSN: 19449720     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1944-9720.2004.tb02429.x     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (1998). ACTFL pevfomance guidelines for K-12 learners. Yonkers, NY: Author. Available online at http://www.state.nj.us/njded/frameworks/worldlanguages/appenda.pdfor can be ordered at http://www.actfl.org/index.cfm?cat=9
2. American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (2001). ACTFL proficiency guidelines-writing (revised). Yonkers, NY Author. Available online at http://www.actfl.org/publidarticles/writingguidelines.pdf
3. American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) (2002). Program standards for the preparation offoreign language teachers: Initial level-undergraduate G graduate) (For K-12 and secondary certification programs) Yonkers, NY: Author. Available online at http://www.actfl.org/public/articles/ncate2002.pdf
4. Brecht, R. D., & Walton, A. R. (1995). The future shape of language learning in the new world of global communication: Consequences for higher education and beyond. In R. Donato Q R. M. Terry (Eds.), Foreign language learning: The journey of a lifetime, The . CTFL foreign language education series (pp. 110-152). Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Co.
5. Breiner-Sanders, K., Lowe, Jr., E, Miles, J., & Swender, E. (2000) ACTFL proficiency guidelines-speaking (revised). Foreign Language Annals, 33(l), 13-18.
6. Center for Applied Linguistics (2002). Computerized oral proficiency instrument. Available online at http://www.cal.org/pro-jects/copi.html
7. Gentile, C. (1992). Exploring new methodsfor collecting school-based writing: UNAEPS 1990 portfolio study. National assessment of educational progress. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
8. Hancock, C. (Ed.) (1994). Teeaching, testing, and assessment: Making the connection. Northeast Conference on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Co.
9. Hewitt, C. B., Ryan, J. M., & Kuhs, T. (1993). Assessment ofstu-dent learning in foreign language. South Carolina Center for Excellence in the Assessment of Student Learning, College of Education, University of South Carolina. [ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED3581621.
10. Humanities Research Center. (2000). Enhanced oral testing software. [Computer software]. Brigham Young University: Humanities Research Center.
11. Kenyon, D., Malabonga, V: (2001, May). Comparing exami-nee attitudes toward computer-assisted and other oral proficiency assessments. Language Learning G Technology 5(2), 60-83.
12. Lafayette, R. C. (Ed.). (1996). National standards: A catalystfor reform. American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Co.
13. Malone, M. (2000). Simulated oral proficiency interviews: Recent developments. Available online at http://www.cal.org/ericclVDIGEST
14. Marcos, K. M. (2000). The foreign language national assessment of educational progress (FL NAEP): Questions and answers. ERICICLL Language Link, October 2000. Available online at http://www.cal.org/ericcll/langlinkl000.html
15. Marwick,J. D. (1998). Academic outcomes assessment: A tool for student learning. University of Illinois, UrbanalChampaign. [ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED4229911.
16. Moore, Z. T. (1994). The portfolio in testing culture. In C. Hancock (Ed.), Teaching, testing, and assessment: Making the connection (pp. 163-182). Northeast Conference on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Co.
17. Mullen, L., Bauer, W. I., Newbold, W (2001). Developing a university-wide electronic portfolio system for teacher education. Kairos: A Journal f or Teachers Writing in Webbed Environments, 6(2) Fall 2001. Available online at http:/English.ttu.edu/kairos/6.Ucovenveb/assessmentullen-bauernewbood/mail.htm
18. National Standards in Foreign Language Education Project. (1996). Standardsforforeign language learning: Preparingfor the 21st century. Lawrence, KS: Allen Press.
19. Phillips, J. K., Q Draper, J. B. (1999). Thefve CS: Standardsfor foreign language learning work text. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
20. Rennie, J. (1998). Current trends in foreign language assessment. The ERIC Review, 6( l ), 27-30.
21. Schrier, L. L., Q Hammadou, J. (1994) Assessment in foreign language teacher education. In C. Hancock (Ed.), Teaching, testing, and assessment: Making the connection (pp. 211-234). Northeast Conference on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Co.
22. Stansfield, C. W., & Kenyon, D. M. (1992). The development and validation of a simulated oral proficiency interview. Modem LanguageJournal 76, 129-141.
23. Strong start for NAEP language assessment (2000, June). CAL Reporter: News from the Center for Applied Linguistics, 14Uune 2000). Available online at http://www.cal.org/pubs/CALReporterlCR14.html
24. Weber State University (2003). WSU 2003-2004 catalog. Ogden, UT: Author.